Detection and Prediction of Ovulation From Body Temperature Measured by an In-Ear Wearable Thermometer
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We present a non-invasive wearable device for fertility monitoring and propose an effective and flexible statistical learning algorithm to detect and predict ovulation using data captured by this device. METHODS: The system consists of an earpiece, which measures the ear canal temperature every 5 min during night sleep hours, and a base station that transmits data to a smartphone application for analysis. We establish a data-cleaning protocol for data preprocessing and then fit a Hidden Markov Model (HMM) with two hidden states of high and low temperature to identify the more probable state of each time point via the predicted probabilities. Finally, a post-processing procedure is developed to incorporate biorhythm information to form a time-course biphasic profile for each subject. RESULTS: The performance of the proposed algorithms applied to data collected by the device are compared with traditional methods in terms of match rate with self-reported ovulation days confirmed with an ovulation test kit. Empirical study results from a group of 34 users yielded significant improvements over the traditional methods in terms of detection accuracy (with sensitivity 92.31%) and prediction power (23.07-31.55% higher). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the feasibility for reliable ovulation detection and prediction with high-frequency temperature data collected by a non-invasive wearable device. SIGNIFICANCE: Traditional fertility monitoring methods are often either inaccurate or inconvenient. The wearable device and learning algorithm presented in this paper provide a user friendly and reliable platform for tracking ovulation, which may have a broad impact on both fertility research and real-world family planning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The YONO device detected ovulation (LH surge) (±3 days) with 92.3% sensitivity using a temperature sensor in 64 cycles with sufficient temperature data.
“- Using 64 cycles with sufficient T data, ovulation [LH surge] (± 3 days) was detected with 92.3% sensitivity using T sensor.”
From Temperature regulation in women: Effects of the menstrual cycle (2020) · cites this paper as [182]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 53
- Authors
- Luo, L., She, X., Cao, J., Zhang, Y., Li, Y., & Song, P. X. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
- Published
- 2020-02
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 512-522
- ISSN
- 0018-9294 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2531
- OpenAlex
- W2946304402
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 6.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Keywords
- ovulation detection, ovulation prediction, body temperature, ear canal temperature, fertility monitoring, hidden Markov models, biological rhythms, family planning, mobile application
- MeSH terms
- Wearable Electronic Devices, Adult, Algorithms, Body Temperature, Ear, Equipment Design, Female, Humans, Markov Chains, Ovulation, Ovulation Detection, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Thermometers, Young Adult, Thermometry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review